This article was downloaded by: [185.55.64.

226]
On: 16 March 2015, At: 10:47
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:
Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Occupational Safety

and Ergonomics
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription
information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tose20

Accidents in Malaysian Construction Industry:

Statistical Data and Court Cases
a a
Heap Yih Chong & Thuan Siang Low
a
Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Published online: 08 Jan 2015.

Click for updates

To cite this article: Heap Yih Chong & Thuan Siang Low (2014) Accidents in Malaysian Construction Industry:
Statistical Data and Court Cases, International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 20:3, 503-513

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2014.11077064

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content)
contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our
licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or
suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are
the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.
The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever
caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial
or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can
be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE) 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3, 503513

Accidents in Malaysian Construction Industry:

Statistical Data and Court Cases
Heap Yih Chong
Thuan Siang Low

Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Safety and health issues remain critical to the construction industry due to its workingenvironment and the
complexity of working practises. This research attempts to adopt 2 research approaches using statistical data
and court cases to address and identify the causes and behavior underlying construction safety and health
issues in Malaysia. Factual data on the period of 20002009 were retrieved to identify the causes and agents
that contributed to health issues. Moreover, court cases were tabulated and analyzed to identify legal patterns
of parties involved in construction site accidents. Approaches of this research produced consistent results and
highlighted a significant reduction in the rate of accidents per construction project in Malaysia.
Downloaded by [185.55.64.226] at 10:47 16 March 2015

accidents causes statistical data court cases construction industry Malaysia

1. Introduction results of a common questionnaire survey in this

The construction industry has been identified as
one of the most hazardous industries in many parts
of the world, as measured by work-related mortal-
ity, workers compensation, injury and fatality
rates [1, 2, 3, 4]. Safety at work is a complex phe-
nomenon and a subjective area of study. This is
because industrial safety has undergone significant
changes over the past decade [5]. However, the
construction sector is notable as it continues to reg-
ister a high rate of accident-related casualties. Con-
struction workers who work within the construc-
tion industry face a greater risk of fatality than
workers in other industries [6, 7].
To prevent accidents, one must know the causes
of accidents in the working environment such as
inherently hazardous construction projects [4], per-
sonal and project factors [8], and mechanisms or
equipment that lead to accidents [9, 10]. Statistical
data are necessary to identify the causes and agents
of accidents in the Malaysian construction indus-
try. The results would be more reliable than the
area of research. Therefore, recorded data were
retrieved for the years 20002009. The data were
collected from the responsible local government
agency, the Social Security Organization
(SOCSO). This supports the first objective of this
research, which is to identify the causes and agents
of accidents in the Malaysian construction
industry.
The construction industry is a complex practise
by nature due to fragmented working processes,
which involve many stakeholders. The responsibil-
ities and obligations of each party tend to overlap
during the course of accidents due to unclear pro-
visions or regulations in construction contracts
[11]. Legal liabilities need to be investigated and
identified through court cases related to safety and
health issues in the construction industry. This
could suggest certain prevention techniques
regarding causation patterns identified from the
cases and descriptions of the accidents [12]. Thus,
for the second objective, a different research
approach is adopted to identify the legal patterns of

Correspondence should be sent to Heap Yih Chong, Department of Construction Management, School of Built Environment, Curtin
University, Australia. E-mail: heapyih.chong@curtin.edu.au.

503
 504 H.Y. CHONG & T.S. LOW
construction safety and health through investiga-
tion of court cases. The results arising from the
law are of utmost importance to all parties
involved in construction projects.
Effective safety approaches and remedial
actions may be taken to prevent and minimize
reoccurrences in the future with help of factual
statistical data. Moreover, participants in the con-
struction industry have to learn and understand
applicable legal rules. This research can provide
sources for them to explore and understand legal
issues regarding safety and health, and their legal
liabilities and obligations. The combined results
demonstrate the behavior and patterns of safety
and health issues in construction sites. Ultimately,
this may strengthen awareness and moral obliga-
Downloaded by [185.55.64.226] at 10:47 16 March 2015
tions on safety and health issues in the Malaysian
construction industry.
2. Hazards
The inherent hazards and the nature of the job
performed by workers contribute to occupational
injuries [13]. There are three types of hazard
which need to be recognized and controlled in all
industries, especially the construction industry:
chemical, physical and biological [14]. Physical
hazards can cause direct injury or internal bleed-
ing to a worker on a site [15]. Negative attitudes
and behavior discourage many workers from put-
ting on their personal protective equipment while
working on site [16]. Inconvenience is another
reason for not putting on protective equipment.
Nowadays, contractors, who rely on insurance,
tend to pass on most of the responsibility for
damages and liability to an insurance company
[17]. Secondly, poor communication and co-
ordination between management and employees
are causes of accidents [18, 19, 20]. Workers
often come from various countries. Some do not
speak or understand the local language. As a
result, safety committees face difficulties in com-
municating hazard areas and potential accidents
that may occur at the site [21].
Moreover, workers tasks are repetitive in the
construction industry. The construction industry
also involves extensive movement of site workers
within a workplace. The more movement there is
JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3
within the site, the greater the possibility that
accidents will arise [4]. The situation becomes
worse for a more complex design of a building
[22]. More complexity in a design tends to
involve a greater likelihood of accidents in a
workplace, such as falls [23]. Besides, a construc-
tion project involves structural, architectural,
bricklaying and plumbing work, and monitoring
and evaluation. Each kind of work is performed
by a specialized group of workers. Workers are
trained in a specialized construction; other types
of equipment that are available might not be
familiar to them. Moreover, workers tend to
apply the same knowledge and techniques even
when the nature of the project is different [24].
Hence, there are many potential causes of injury
to workers in a workplace [4]. The construction
site consists of a lot of sophisticated tools and
equipment. Qualified personnel only can operate
this equipment. Many nonqualified operators suf-
fer injuries caused by improper handling of
equipment. This is because an unqualified practi-
tioner is not able to analyze a situation and
respond accordingly [21].
3. Legal liabilities
Every worker involved in a construction process
must understand their rights and liabilities. The
law facilitates the management of safety and
health in a workplace [5]. If an individual breaks
the law, they will be the one personally liable for
the consequences of their actions. The main
distinction in terms of liability here is between
civil and criminal liability. Civil liability gives a
person rights to obtain redress from another
person, e.g., the ability to sue for damages for
personal injury [25]. For there to be an award of
damages, the injured party has to suffer an actual
loss, be it personal injury, property damage or
financial loss arising from tort or contract law.
Criminal liability is a more serious offence that
involves imprisonment and more serious
punishment. With construction-related safety and
health issues, criminal liability mainly falls into
areas of gross negligence and recklessness such
as harm to an individual or society [26]. This area
of criminal liability is not a major concern of this
 Construction Industry Accidents 505

research, the scope of which concentrates on civil 5. Statistical Data

liability as the normal scenario in Malaysia.
Moreover, civil courts are better at appraising In 20002009, SOCSO reported 656555 acci-
appropriate financial sanctions compared to dents in all industries (6.5% of all accidents in
criminal systems [27]. industries) and 42775 accidents in the Malaysian
construction industry. The data were retrieved
from the hardcopy of annual reports for the years
4. Research ApproachES 20002009 in SOSCOs head office. Yet, the
online version was available and uploaded in the
This research adopted two research approaches
website from 2009 onwards [28]. Figure 1 shows
from quantitative and qualitative analysis. Factual
the total number of accidents by gender. The
statistical data and court cases were separated
mean number of accidents for male was 3894 and
into groups for analysis. Qualitative data of court
for female was 384. Out of the total number of
cases were converted into quantitative data to
accidents, 890 were fatalities cases and 5985
make the analysis easier and more comprehensi-
were permanent disablement. Figures 23 show
ble in the form of bar charts, rather than in a
the number of death and permanent disablement
descriptive form.
Downloaded by [185.55.64.226] at 10:47 16 March 2015

cases by gender. The number of accidents and the

5000
4456 4588
4500 4263
4189 4048
4000
3624 3643
3500 3390 3360 3374
Accidents

3000
male
2500 workers
2000
female
1500 workers
1000
417 404 427 391 397 336 296 343 364 465
500
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
Figure 1. Accidents by gender (20002009).

200
157
150
121 male
Fatalities

workers
100 92
84 84 77 female
73
61 62 workers
46
50

2 5 4 3 4 6 3 3 2 1
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
Figure 2. Death cases by gender (20002009).

JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3

 506 H.Y. CHONG & T.S. LOW

Permanent Disablement Cases 700

572 594 607
600 580
519 523 523 532
500 498
500

400 male
workers
300 female
200 workers

100 84
62 46 58 47 43 43 43 57 54
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
Figure 3. Permanent disablement cases by gender (20002009).

permanent disablement cases have a similar ratio accidents (17106). U.S. Washington States
by gender, where there were less cases for female Department of Labor and Industries defines a
Downloaded by [185.55.64.226] at 10:47 16 March 2015

workers than for male workers. The number of floor opening as a ~31 cm or more opening in a
death cases decreased overall and involved fewer floor, roof or platform, while a wall opening is a
female workers only compared to male workers. ~76-cm-high and ~46-cm-wide opening in a wall
Most reported cases involved male workers or partition through which persons may fall, e.g.,
because of the relatively low number of female a window [29].
workers on construction sites. Table 1 shows the Accidents with trucks are extremely critical
number of construction workers in 20002009. (11622 reported cases). Trucks are commonly
Only 9% of the total number of construction work- used for transporting loose material such as sand,
ers were female workers; according to the classifi- dirt or gravel for the construction industry [30].
cation of the Department of Statistics Malaysia of They also deliver materials from suppliers to job
female (95000 in 2010 and 103300 in 2011) and sites, including reinforcement bars, bricks, tiles,
male workers (987700 in 2010 and 1030300 in timber and others. A recent study found that the
2011) in the construction industry [28]. number of fatal accidents of heavy vehicle drivers
aged 2124 was higher than that of drivers aged
TABLE 1. Construction Workers (20002009) 60 and over [31]. The older the driver is, the
Year No. of workers
2000 759.900
TABLE 2. Agents of Accidents (20002009)
2001 829.800
2002 905.100 Agent Reported Cases
2003 942.500 Working environment 17106
2004 890.800 floor and wall opening 6774
2005 904.400 stairs 6036
2006 908.900 confined space 4296
2007 922.500 Transport and lifting equipment 12570
2008 998.000 truck 11622
2009 1015.900 tower crane 653
lift 295
5.1. Agents of Accidents Other equipment 4205
ladder and mobile ramp 3386
Table 2 shows agents of accidents in the Malay- scaffolding 819
sian construction industry. Agents such as floor Machines 682
and wall openings, stairs and confined spaces in earth moving machines, excavating 682
the working environment category caused most and scraping machines

JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3

 Construction Industry Accidents 507

lower the fatality rate. Driver fatigue is also a
leading contributor to roadway crashes. In gen-
eral, fatigue affects driving performance and
attention, and the driver may fall asleep while
driving. Drivers may have an inadequate amount
of sleep because of prolonged working hours,
which cause fatigue [32]. Most cases of struck-by
accidents happened when a truck or dump truck
was reversing [33]. Most fatalities were caused
by vehicles without a reversing alarm.
5.2. Causes of Accidents
Factual statistical data on causes of accidents
were investigated after examining the back-
grounds and agents of accidents. Table 3 shows
Downloaded by [185.55.64.226] at 10:47 16 March 2015
The most common type of accident is stepping
on, striking against or being struck by objects,
which happens when moving construction equip-
ment strikes or runs over workers. In 20052009,
there were 8997 accidents. Figure 4 shows a con-
tinuous increase in the number of accidents.
According to the results, trucks are a top agent in
the Malaysian construction industry.
Falls are a critical cause of accidents with an
annual average of 1042 cases in Malaysia. Previ-
ous studies also pointed out that falls were the
most common type of accident in the construc-
tion industry [34]. According to the Occupational
Injury and Illness Classification Manual, falls can
be grouped into 11 categories [35]:

causes of accidents for 20052009 according to falls from stairs or steps;

SOSCO data. Figure 4 summarizes data on acci-
dents caused by various causes. The data pro-
vided certain references and knowledge on the
causes of accidents as data for the past 5 years
could not be compared to the 10 years data on
the agents of accidents.
TABLE 3. Causes of Accidents (20052009)
Causes
Stepping on, striking against or
struck by object
Falls
Other types of accidents
Caught in between objects
Overexertion or strenuous
movements
falls through existing floor openings;
falls from ladders;
falls through roof surfaces;
falls from roof edges;
falls from scaffolding or staging;
falls from building girders or other structural
steel;
falls while jumping to a lower level;
Reported Cases falls through existing openings;
8997 falls from floors, docks or ground level;
other nonclassified falls to lower levels.
5209
2450 The third highest group of accidents is the
1855 group including other nonclassified types of acci-
684 dents such as structure collapse, electrocution,
fire, drowning, explosion and toxification. This

2000
1963
1959
1800
1701 1826
1600
1548 stepping on, striking or
1400 being struck by objects
Accidents

1200 1157 falls

1085 1063
1000 other types of accident
984 920
800 caught in between objects
592 565 533
600 over-exertion or strenuous
420 485
400 295 movements
310 393
437
200
90 51 186 197 160
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Years
Figure 4. Causes of accidents (20002009).

JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3

 508 H.Y. CHONG & T.S. LOW
group has an average of 490 reported cases per
year.
Accidents involving being in between objects
were reported 371 times per year (1855 in total
for 20052009). These accidents were usually
caused by being buried inside a hole or trench. In
most situations, the soil collapsed and trapped
workers. This kind of accident attracts attention
of the public.
Overexertion or strenuous movements are
another type of accidents in industry. A com-
pressed work program and delays in a project
schedule are the reasons of accidents. Figure 4
shows that the number of accidents caused by
overexertion or strenuous movements increases
(137 cased on average each year).
Downloaded by [185.55.64.226] at 10:47 16 March 2015
6. Court Cases
Data on 30 court cases were retrieved from the
Malayan Law Journal and related reports in
Lexis-Nexis. Selected court cases were related to
Malaysian construction safety and health issues
in 19612011. Most court cases were civil suits
(12 cases). Cases which were brought to the
Court of Appeal and Supreme Court were the
least numerous (two cases in each court). Cases
brought to the Federal Court and the High Court
of Malaysia were nine and five, respectively.
There were 14 claims involving an employee
(plaintiff) and an employer (defendant). There
were seven cases in which the employer claimed
fall
machinery & equipment error
being struck
Cause of Accidents
vehicle error
fire
loading & unloading error
collapse
flood
explosion
gaseous fumes and vapor
improper storage of material
nervous shock
0 2
Figure 5. Causes of accidents in Malaysia.
JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3
or appealed against the employee. There was one
case from other allegations between the parties
such as the subcontractor and contractor, licensee
and occupier, occupier and employee, etc. These
cases could be categorized into four levels of
injuries, i.e., minor injury, major injury, disable-
ment and death. The cases with different levels of
injuries are broadly similar. There were seven
cases of minor injury, seven cases of disablement,
seven cases of death and nine cases of major
injury. Within 30 cases, the proportions of both
plaintiffs and defendants winning their cases
were almost even with 12 and 11 cases, respec-
tively. Seven cases were upheld by the courts as
contributory negligence. Contributory negligence
is a partial defence to a claim brought against a
construction professional. The professional may
have been in breach of duty but may also be able
to argue that the claimant was partially the author
of misfortune by failing to take reasonable care to
protect themself [36]. Therefore, both a plaintiff
and a defendant have to bear the responsibility of
the consequences but with a different proportion
of responsibilities, depending on the circum-
stances and evidence.
6.1 Causes of Accidents
Figure 5 shows causes of accidents at the con-
struction site. Nine causes were categorized and
analyzed. Accidents caused by incorrect use or
poor maintenance of material and equipment
were the most common (14 cases), followed by
13
14
10
3
3
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
4 6 8 10 12 14
Number of Accidents
 Construction Industry Accidents 509

falls (13 cases), being struck (10 cases) and acci-
dents caused by collapse of building structures (3
cases). The results are similar to the statistical
data obtained from SOSCO, which confirmed
and strengthened the analysis of causes of acci-
dents in the Malaysian construction industry [28].
6.2. Penalties and Compensation
Figure 6 illustrates the range of penalties and
compensation which was calculated and deter-
mined in the various judgements by courts of
Malaysia. The party that was held liable would
have to pay the amount to the other party. The
penalties tend to be monetary compensation. The
most common amount of compensation ranged
Downloaded by [185.55.64.226] at 10:47 16 March 2015
7. Discussion
The factual statistical data retrieved from the
Department of Occupational Safety and Health
(DOSH) cannot indicate the actual and absolute
construction safety and health scenario in Malay-
sia. The number of reported accidents needs to be
compared with the total number of construction
projects in an individual year. This could demon-
strate trends and an accurate ratio of accidents in
the Malaysian construction industry. The data-
base on construction projects was retrieved from
the Construction Industry Development Board
(CIDB), which registers all construction projects
in Malaysia. The construction projects are catego-
rized as residential projects, nonresidential

from 3101 to 15500 USD and was charged in 11
out of 30 cases. In two case only compensation
ranged from 622001 to 933000 USD. Penalties
were not specified in three cases.
projects, mixed developments, social amenities,
infrastructure and others. Figure 7 shows the ratio
of the total number of accidents recorded by
DOSH compared to the total number of projects
registered in Malaysia by CIDB in 20002009.

12 11
10
Accidents

8
6
6
4 4 4
2 3
2
0
100 500 100 000 000 ified
03 115 0131 1622 1933 spec
310 15 5 31 10 2 00 not
62
Penalty/Compensation (USD)
Figure 6. Penalties and compensation charged in Malaysian cases.

1.2

1.0

0.8
Accidents

0.6
ratio
0.4

0.2

0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
Figure 7. Accidents compared to total number of projects.

JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3

 510 H.Y. CHONG & T.S. LOW
The number of accidents increased within 10
years and amounted to 0.82 accident per project.
The highest accident rate in construction projects
was in 2000 with 1.10 cases per project. Then, the
accident rate began to decrease until the lowest
point in 2007 with 0.5 accident per project; the
possibility of an accident was 50%. The accident
incident rate (total number of accidents 200000/h
worked by all employees) decreased from 0.64 to
0.40 in 20002009. Meanwhile, fatal accident
rate (number of fatalities 108/total h worked by
all employees) also significantly decreased from
10.5 to 2.31 over 10 years of 20002009. The
number of permanent disablement cases remained
high (642 cases in 2000, 691 cases in 2009) and
was further investigated. This was the limitation
Downloaded by [185.55.64.226] at 10:47 16 March 2015
of this research. The trend in construction safety
and health is improving and heading in a positive
direction according to the overall analysis of
20002009. There is an improvement in safety
effectiveness in the Malaysian construction
industry, which is the result of the growth and
establishment of enacted laws and regulations,
professional practises, safety policies, and defined
management plans and strategies.
The second approach of this research was based
on analysis of court cases under the statute law
and included common law jurisprudence. All
employers are obliged to protect their employees
under common law. This extends into all employ-
ment contracts and employers responsibility to
take care of their employees safety and health.
Employers will be liable for their negligence,
vicarious liability and contributory negligence.
An employer is obliged to provide a safe place of
work, to provide and maintain a safe system of
TABLE 4. Comparison of Accident Categories: Striking Against or Struck by Objects and Falls
Study Country Year
Tam, Zeng & Deng [37] China 1999
1
Mohan & Zech [38] USA 19902001
Lopez, Fontanada & Spain 19902000
Alcantara [39]
Im, Kwon, Kim, et al. [40] Korea 19972004
Cheng, Lin & Leu [3] Taiwan 20002007
No study Malaysia 20052009
Notes. *overlapping areas; 1 = data for New York, NY.
JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3
work, provide adequate equipment, and recruit
competent and safety-conscious staff. If an
employer fails to take reasonable care in any of
these areas, an employee has certain legal claims
and may be able to resign and claim constructive
unfair dismissal and personal injury. Meanwhile,
an employer, as the occupier of the premises, has
both physical possession and control over the
area where workers are working at the time of the
accident and if it is proved that an employer had
breached statutory duty, his employer may be lia-
ble for contributory negligence.
The approaches of this research influence the
behavior and trends of construction safety and
health issues in Malaysia. Most causes of acci-
dents belong to two categories: striking against or
being struck by objects. These two categories
require further discussion and examination.
A cross-examination with other countries was
also carried to have a clear reference point or to
see a trend for Malaysian construction safety and
health. The comparison was based on the cases
reported in DOSH against the results from the
existing literature. Table 4 shows a comparison of
the total number of cases of striking against or
being struck by objects, and falls. The number of
reported accidents was high in various countries
in categories striking against or being struck by
objects, and falls. The findings show that striking
against or being struck by objects ranked higher
than falls in Taiwan, Spain, New York and
Malaysia, but not in Korea and China. Neverthe-
less, these two causes are the most dangerous
hazards in construction accidents in all countries.
This shows that over 50% of all accidents in
industry were related to these two categories,
Striking Against or Total Accidents or
Struck by Objects (%) Falls (%) Cases Investigated
24.2 48.4 2319
43.3 18.7 2161
40.4 20.9 630452
16.8 54.1 4333
73.0* 59.0* 1347
46.9 27.1 19195

even though the statistical results varied in terms
of data collection and years. The results confirm
that the causes of accidents in the Malaysian con-
struction industry are similar to the causes of
accidents in other construction industries. Thus, a
continuing search for innovative and effective
safety management plans or precaution methods
is necessary for the whole construction industry,
particularly for these two categories of accidents.
8. Conclusions
The analysis of statistical data and court cases
contributes to safety and health in the Malaysian
construction industry. The research outcomes of
the approach complement each other. The causes
Downloaded by [185.55.64.226] at 10:47 16 March 2015
of construction accidents are mainly striking
against or being struck by objects, and falls but
the judgments of court cases are even for plain-
tiffs and defendants, and involve critical injuries
and death issues.
Certain limitations and recommendations need
to be highlighted. The limited number of court
cases provides a better perspective of safety and
health issues. It does not represent the whole liti-
gation behavior. Statistical data should be investi-
gated because of changes in technologies and
practises in the construction industry. Therefore,
the actual situation of construction safety and
health issues could be identified. This is a limita-
tion of this research. Nevertheless, the combined
results meet the research objectives by identify-
ing the factual root causes of site accidents and
the legal patterns of the parties involved in the
Malaysian construction industry.
The findings could help to raise safety aware-
ness and provide useful references for further
effective safety precautions and management
plans (root causes of construction accidents, con-
struction related legislation). The results can help
to improve the working environment and produc-
tivity in Malaysia construction industry.
References
1. Hassanein AA, Hanna RS. Safety programmes
in the Egyptian construction industry. Int J Inj
Contr Saf Promot. 2007;14(4):2517.
Construction Industry Accidents 511
2. Ling FYY, Liu M, Woo YC. Construction
fatalities in Singapore. International Journal of
Project Management. 2009;27(7):71726.
3. Cheng CW, Lin CC, Leu SS. Use of
association rules to explore causeeffect
relationships in occupational accidents in
the Taiwan construction industry. Saf Sci.
2010;48(4):43644.
4. Pinto A, Nunes IL, Ribeir RA. Occupational
risk assessment in construction industry
overview and reection. Saf Sci. 2011;49(5):
61624.
5. Badri A, Gbodossou A, Nadeau S.
Occupational health and safety risks:
towards the integration into project
management. Saf Sci. 2012;50(2):1908.
6. Aksorn T, Hadikusumo BHW. Critical
success factors influencing safety program
performance in Thai construction projects.
Saf Sci. 2008;46(4):70927.
7. Bansal VK. Application of geographical
information systems in construction safety
planning. International Journal of Project
Management. 2011;29(1):6677.
8. Kines P, Andersen LP, Spangenberg S,
Mikkelsen KL, Dyreborg J, Zohar D.
Improving construction site safety through
leader-based verbal safety communication.
J Safety Res. 2010;41(5):399406.
9. McCann M. Heavy equipment and truck-
related deaths on excavation work sites.
JSafety Res. 2006;37(5):5117.
10. Tam VWY, Fung IWH. Tower crane safety
in the construction industry: a Hong Kong
study. Saf Sci. 2011;49(2):20815.
11. Chong HY, Zin RM. A case study into the
language structure of construction standard
form in Malaysia. International Journal of
Project Management. 2010;28(6):6018.
12. Grcanli GE. Who is at fault? Third party
and child injuries at construction sites in
Turkey. Saf Sci. 2009;47(3):36473.
13. Khanzode VV, Maiti J, Ray PK. Injury
count model for quantification of risk of
occupational injury.Int J Inj Contr Saf
Promot. 2011;18(2):15162.
14. Sekheta MA, Sahtout AH, Sekheta NF,
Kapkovic M, Pantovic N. The HACCP
implementation and the mental illness of
food handlers as the 4th eventual hazard.
Internet Journal of Food Safety. 2005;6:510.
JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3
 512 H.Y. CHONG & T.S. LOW
15. Burrows W, editor. Human diseases. In:
Britannica Encyclopedia Online. Retrieved
July 21, 2014, from: http://www.britannica.
com/EBchecked/topic/275628/
humandisease/63229/Physical-injury.
16. Dedobbeler N, Bland F. A safety climate
measure for construction sites. J Safety
Res. 1991;22(2):97103.
17. Lingard H, Rowlinson S. Behavior-based
safety management in Hong Kongs
construction industry. J Safety Res. 1997;
28(4):24356.
18. Teo EAL, Ling FYY, Chong AFW.
Framework for project managers to manage
construction safety. International Journal of
Project Management. 2005;23(4):32941.
19. Lauver KJ. Human resource safety practices
Downloaded by [185.55.64.226] at 10:47 16 March 2015
and employee injuries. Journal of Managerial
Issues. 2007;19(3):397413.
20. Hsu SH,Lee CC. Safety management in a
relationship-oriented culture. International
Journal of Occupational Safety and
Ergonomics (JOSE). 2012;18(1):3545.
Retrieved July 21, 2014, from: http://www.
ciop.pl/50491.
21. Haslam RA, Hide SA, Gibb AGF, Gyi DE,
Pavitt T, Atkinson S, et al. Contributing
factors in construciton accidents. Appl
Ergon. 2005;36(4):40115.
22. Gambatese JA, Behm M, Hinze JW. Viability
of designing for construction worker safety.
J Constr Eng Manag. 2005;131(9):102936.
23. Navon R, Kolton O. Model for automated
monitoring of fall hazards in building
construction. J Constr Eng Manag. 2006;
132(7):73340.
24. Podgrski D. The use of tacit knowledge in
occupational safety and health management
systems. International Journal of Occupa-
tional Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE).
2010;16(3):283310. Retrieved July 21,
2014, from: http://www.ciop.pl/37944.
25. White NJ. Construction law for managers,
architects and engineers. New York, NY,
USA: Thomson Delmar Learning; 2008.
26. Johnson CW. Ten contentions of corporate
manslaughter legislation: public policy and
the legal response to workplace accidents.
Saf Sci. 2008;46(3):34970.
27. Mekos KZ. Complaint reports for violations
of health and safety legislation in the area
JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3
of Thessaloniki (Greece). Saf Sci. 2010;
48(2):20914.
28. Social Security Organization (SOCSO).
Annual Report 2009. Labuan, Indonesia:
Social Security Organization (SOCSO).
Retrieved July 21, 2014, from: http://www.
perkeso.gov.my/images/Laporan_
Tahunan_2009_Lengkap.pdf.
29. Washington State Department of Labor and
Industries. Safety and health core rules.
Washington, WA, USA: Washington State
Department of Labor and Industries; 2014.
Retrieved July 21, 2014, from: http://www.
lni.wa.gov/Safety/Rules/chapter/800/
WAC296-800.PDF.
30. Bohm J,Harris D. Risk perception and
risk-taking behavior of construction site
dumper drivers. International Journal of
Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
(JOSE). 2010;16(1):5567. Retrieved July
21, 2014, from: http://www.ciop.pl/35528.
31. Duke J, Guest M, Boggess M. Age-related
safety in professional heavy vehicle drivers: a
literature review. Accid Anal Prev. 2010;
42(2):36471.
32. Akerstedt T. Consensus statement: fatigue
and accidents in transport operations.
JSleep Res. 2000;9(4):395.
33. Hinze JW, Teizer J. Visibility-related
fatalities related to construction equipment.
Saf Sci. 2011;49(5):70918.
34. Huang X, Hinze J. Analysis of construction
worker fall accidents. J Constr Eng Manag.
2003;129(3):26271.
35. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics. Occupational Injury and Illness
Classification Manual. Washington, WA,
USA: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Statistics; 2012. Retrieved July 21,
2014, from: http://www.bls.gov/iif/
oshoiics.htm.
36. Patten B. Professional negligence in construc-
tion. London, UK; Taylor & Francis; 2003.
37. Tam CM, Zeng SX, Deng ZM. Identifying
elements of poor construction safety
management in China. Saf Sci. 2004;42(7):
56986.
38. Mohan S, Zech WC. Characteristics of
worker accidents on NYSDOT construction
projects. J Saf Res. 2005;36(4):35360.

39. Caimino Lpez MA, Fontaneda RI,
Alcantara OJG. Construction industry
accidents in Spain. J Saf Res. 2008;
39(5):497507.
Downloaded by [185.55.64.226] at 10:47 16 March 2015
Construction Industry Accidents 513
40. Im HJ, Kwon YJ, Kim SG, Kim YK,
JuYS, Lee HP. The characteristics of fatal
occupational injuries in Koreas construction
industry, 19972004. Saf Sci. 2009;47(8):
115962.
JOSE 2014, Vol. 20, No. 3